(Close Window)
Topic: Quick question for owners of Trilogy from Alakazam
Message: Posted by: VIEW (Nov 10, 2008 06:23PM)
Okay, as I see it, these are the versions

Trilogy original
Trilogy 2.0 (same as original, but has a dvd)
Trilogy streamline (uses only one deck and has a dvd too)
Trilogy Bikes (also with dvd)

Sorry, but there's so much disparate information on this/these effects.

So I want to ask - is the bike version exactly the same as the original?
Does the original have the same odd low / even high 'directions'?

Thanks in advance by the way, there's just so much on these and the variants.
Message: Posted by: Blackwood (Nov 10, 2008 08:21PM)
I understand. I bought two versions just to check. It's confusing.

The original is my preferred version. It does not require the high/low directions which, though probably no concern to participants, didn't seem quite as smooth to me. The Bike version requires the additional high/low direction.

My advice: buy 2.0 and, before you mark the cards, read Jheff's review on Marketplace of the Mind for a way to streamline the effect and get two sets out of it.
Message: Posted by: bugjack (Nov 10, 2008 08:33PM)
I have Trilogy 2.0 and the restrictions are "high" and "low" for the first two cards but not "odd" and even." Maybe the original substituted "odd" and "even" for "high" and "low" -- I don't know.

Jheff says just to make a two-card prediction, but I like the three step reveal. Jheff thinks it makes the trick more "mental magic" than "mentalism." To each his own, I guess.
Message: Posted by: DrTodd (Nov 11, 2008 12:53AM)
I have done Streamline for over 2 years now and it is with me for walk around, parlour and stage work. I have not had any problems with the cues and have always had unbelievable reactions. I like the fact that the deck is in play throughout the whole routine and remains visible through the entire number selections. For stage, I have a particiapnt note the card and number choices on a pad, and I give each card out to participants either on stage or at their dinner tables as I walk amongst the guests. The revelations build to an impossible climax and you have three applause cues that get louder.

It is great for after-dinner, intimate performances, and walk around. You can either use the dinner tabls or the hands of the participants for the cards. For walk around, you can draw in a crowd and then follow up with other material.

I cannot recommend this enough. Mine will need to be replaced soon since I use it so much!
Message: Posted by: JanForster (Nov 11, 2008 12:54AM)
Think about it, using the original version which is the best in my opinion, I don't use high and low, but odd and even giving a logical reason, avoiding getting same numbers. Sounds better as each spectator can think of any number from 1 to 52. And I would bring one deck into play very early demonstrating what you've done with it. Put it back in its case, pocket it as you need hands free to write their answers down (big pad if you do stage, or 3 business cards for close-up). Important subtlety: I have on both decks the same number on the back and the same card on the face... Jan
Message: Posted by: Anthony Jacquin (Nov 11, 2008 01:13AM)
I prefer to use Streamline. One deck in play before the spectators selections are made.

Use the subtlety mentioned in the instructions for the odd/even. Then use verbal and physical suggestion subtleties and just let them have a free choice of number. If they do not hit then the Knepper subtlety of conscious/unconscious choice plays well.

Now that's a whole lotta subtleties.

Clearly this effect is super strong no matter what version you use.

Anthony
Message: Posted by: LLL (Nov 11, 2008 02:23AM)
Agreed, used this Saturday night at a gig and got some amazing reactions with it.

Andy
Message: Posted by: Roger Kelly (Nov 11, 2008 02:54AM)
I've said it before and will say it again. the original version of Trilogy is perfect. Some will argue that it can't be 'seen' from the start. I disagree. I'm performing Trilogy (original) and the 'deck' is on show right from the beginning in a Peter Scarlett Card Box. (A Fantasio **c* *w***h** will work just as well but looks tacky!) I used the odd/even scenario right from the beginning and even spoke to the creator, Brian Caswell about it who agreed it was probably a better idea than the high/low option.

Jan: I like your interesting subtelty of identical marks on the cards. Hadn't thought of that.

I was very disappointed in the Trilogy Bikes after learning of the added separation issue but I should have know better!

Just a quickie - perhaps I ought to begin a new thread though thinking about it - what is the difference between Trilogy Streamline and Duality by Gary Jones?
Message: Posted by: pegasus (Nov 11, 2008 03:22AM)
I call my version Quadology. 1 deck with 4 predictions. It appears perfectly fair, and the chances (the way I perform it) has a 1 in 105625 chance of success, which is part of my patter. I will video a performance very soon and you can tell me what you think. It Gets amazing reactions, especially from specs who understand the odds of me being correct 4 times in a row.
Message: Posted by: lucavolpe (Nov 11, 2008 05:20AM)
I use the streamline version (with one deck) ..works great!
You can see at this link :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d15izoAczwg
Message: Posted by: luxor07 (Nov 12, 2008 12:55PM)
Nice presentation Luca!
Message: Posted by: Ethan (Nov 22, 2008 01:09PM)
In my opinion if pocket space is not an issue then the original wins every time. If pocket space is an issue then you lose a little but still very powerful with the stream lined version. Bikes are completely unneccessary but will always have it's fans.
Message: Posted by: JanForster (Nov 22, 2008 07:16PM)
Ethan, this is exactly why I prefer the original version of Trilogy whenever I can. Unbeatable, no restrictions. Jan
Message: Posted by: bob tripp (Nov 23, 2008 03:47AM)
Nice Work!!!!!
Message: Posted by: Roger Kelly (Nov 23, 2008 04:11AM)
Guys - forget about pocket space (unless pockets are all you've got of course!) If you can carry one prop, which is up front from the start and is the centrepeice for your story, the *w*t*h devices I refer to above are a dream for this effect.
Message: Posted by: bob tripp (Nov 23, 2008 04:27AM)
Do have any of these. When I said "nice work" in my immediate last reply I was referring to Luca's presentation on you tube.
Message: Posted by: psychicturtle (Nov 23, 2008 04:45AM)
With the original, if you think about it you only need one deck that is on display from the start. You do not need to switch the deck. Pocket space is therefore a non-issue.
I never understood why there were two decks, it made no sense to me. Just extra hassle. Instead of the extra deck I just use a few words
It is SOOOOO easy.
Message: Posted by: Roger Kelly (Nov 23, 2008 05:18AM)
[quote]
On 2008-11-23 05:45, psychicturtle wrote:
With the original, if you think about it you only need one deck that is on display from the start. You do not need to switch the deck. Pocket space is therefore a non-issue.
I never understood why there were two decks, it made no sense to me. Just extra hassle. Instead of the extra deck I just use a few words
It is SOOOOO easy.
[/quote]

What you've just described is clearly NOT the [b]original[/b] but one of the the variety of variations that have been endlessly discussed. The original simply DOES require the extra something. It can't work any other way. If it could, it wouldn't have the addition - would it? So if you have a variation on the premise, by definition, it aint the [b]original.[/b] Sorry.

But you are right - it is easy.
Message: Posted by: lucavolpe (Nov 23, 2008 11:54AM)
Hi BOob and Luxor, thanks for the comment :)
As you can see this version works great,will be great if they can produce a Stage Version with a Jumbo cards...!!
;)
Message: Posted by: psychicturtle (Nov 23, 2008 06:14PM)
[quote]
On 2008-11-23 06:18, Roger Kelly wrote:
So if you have a variation on the premise, by definition, it aint the [b]original.[/b] Sorry.

But you are right - it is easy.
[/quote]
Oh, right, I left out the word 'release'. With the original 'release'.

My point was you can do the effect with only one deck and no switching. I have no idea what the other releases include, as I only got the original. Release, that is.
Message: Posted by: Phil J. (Dec 18, 2008 04:16PM)
I use my own one deck version made from bikes. On show from the start and no switch.
Message: Posted by: pegasus (Feb 1, 2009 01:50PM)
Too many restrictions with bicycle stock, though. It is perfectly plausible to be using a cheapo looking deck and that reason is that you have marked them all.
Message: Posted by: cbmar (Feb 4, 2009 09:45PM)
So the "Streamline" version only relies on 1 deck, and it's in play from the start, but the cards aren't Bikes?
And the Bikes version requires 2 different decks?
I'd seen the trailer (probably the 'Streamline' version since he shows the cards beforehand and even leaves them on the table), so I was confused when my set showed up and required two decks.
Message: Posted by: The great Gumbini (Mar 4, 2009 03:34PM)
I have Trilogy 2.0 and it's really good. Yes you do say hi for one choice and low for the other but you say it in such a way as to try to "help" the spectator find that right number. But you will be able to pull those cards plus the named card (they chose) from the same deck. This is a very powerful effect when performed in a light hearted manner. I perform this with the "we're going to put our minds together and do something fantastic" attitude. And get this I find it is worth wild to ask the spectators BEFORE you do the effect to let everyone know that nothing was set up before hand. I can't tell you how many people came up to after my shows and they say they believe I set this up with my spectators before hand. It is that strong.


Good magic to all,


Eric
Message: Posted by: Simon Bakker (Jul 14, 2009 09:28AM)
I own and have performed the original trilogy in the past. I made it up as in the original instructions, so you have to give the spectators the low/high cue.

Now I want a new one, because I want to make it up so that I can ask one spectator to think of an odd number and another spectator to think of an even number (so that they don't think of the same number).

I was just about to order the bikes version, but then I read this thread.
I want to make one thing clear: the bikes version is not just the original with different (bicycle backs)?

And what is the difference between version 2.0 and the original?
I someone could answer these questions it would be great because I want to order as soon as possible, because I want to use it for two parlour gigs coming up.

Thanks!
Simon
Message: Posted by: Bartelli (Jul 15, 2009 07:40AM)
[quote]
On 2008-11-23 12:54, lucavolpe wrote:
Hi BOob and Luxor, thanks for the comment :)
As you can see this version works great,will be great if they can produce a Stage Version with a Jumbo cards...!!
;)
[/quote]
I saw a dutch mentalist (Joe Pequerrucho) perform a great stage version of this effect. I don't remember if he used the version with one or two decks, but he used a regular pokersize deck for an audience of about 500 people. His presentation was quite different from any other I have seen and it played extremely well on stage.
He used three volunteers which he selected by throwing balls of paper into the audience. And the three predictions were written inside these balls.
Message: Posted by: dmoses (Jul 15, 2009 11:05AM)
What a great idea... although I can't imagine he'd be pleased with you posting it here!

dave
Message: Posted by: Roger Kelly (Jul 16, 2009 03:27AM)
[quote]
On 2009-07-14 10:28, Simon Bakker wrote:
I own and have performed the original trilogy in the past. I made it up as in the original instructions, so you have to give the spectators the low/high cue.

Now I want a new one, because I want to make it up so that I can ask one spectator to think of an odd number and another spectator to think of an even number (so that they don't think of the same number).

I was just about to order the bikes version, but then I read this thread.
I want to make one thing clear: the bikes version is not just the original with different (bicycle backs)?

And what is the difference between version 2.0 and the original?
I someone could answer these questions it would be great because I want to order as soon as possible, because I want to use it for two parlour gigs coming up.

Thanks!
Simon
[/quote]

Hi Simon - just get the original and do as you said which is exactly how I perform it and the creator agreed that odd/even is probably more plausible thatn hi/lo.

[b]ALL[/b] the variants have trade-offs usually by an additional equivoque. The original is simply the way to go. Read back on my use of a certain prop which will allow all to be on display from the start!
Message: Posted by: bugjack (Jul 16, 2009 01:42PM)
The 2.0 only refers to the new version of the instructions, which are on DVD as opposed to printed. I agree -- the original version is the way to go. You can always take it apart and make the streamline yourself if you decide you want the one deck version.
Message: Posted by: Pierre Emmanuel (Jul 17, 2009 02:01PM)
Actually I have a solution to this kind of trick with one deck of standard traditionnal Bikes ..

- The impact of the trick is exactly the same
- The patter can be the same as the Streamline version (if you like it)
- It relies on subtelties that make all the difference
- 100% reliable, the predicted cards can be handled to the spectator, even a magician.
- There is more reason for the 3rd prediction (through a progression in the effect)
- Entirely fits in a regular deck box.
Message: Posted by: gboss (Sep 11, 2009 01:48PM)
Hi,
I would like to ask something about the streamline version. I bought both versions, and as I suppose I misread something in the booklet of streamline v.
Maybe due to my inappropriate English. :(
May I write a PM to somebody?
Message: Posted by: Anthony Jacquin (Sep 11, 2009 02:26PM)
PM me if you do not have your answer yet.

Ant
Message: Posted by: gboss (Sep 11, 2009 03:03PM)
Hi Ant,
I sent you my question in PM. Thanx in advance.

gboss